BENJAMIN EVANS KAH-LAM WANG v. CONCORD LTD

BENJAMIN EVANS KAH-LAM WANG v. CONCORD LTD

The court found on the evidence that the defendant's salesmen represented the car was of 1976 manufacture, that representation was false and was a fundamental term of the contract; because the defendant was in a better position to prove the manufacture year and documentary evidence supported shifting the burden,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
BENJAMIN EVANS KAH-LAM WANG v. CONCORD LTD
Parties
Plaintiff: Benjamin Evans Kah-Lam Wang; Defendant: Concord Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
16 March 1979
Case Number
HCA2023/1978
Procedural Posture
Contract Misrepresentation/sale of Goods / Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for Plaintiff; rescission granted.
Legal Topics
Rescission, Burden of Proof, Representation as Term, Damages, Costs
Source Language
en
Contract Law Misrepresentation Sale of Goods Remedies Rescission Burden of Proof Representation as Term Damages +1 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Benjamin Evans Kah-Lam Wang

Plaintiff

Concord Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Contract Misrepresentation/sale of Goods / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant represented the car was of 1976 manufacture
  2. 2 Whether that representation was a term of the contract and a fundamental condition
  3. 3 Whether the representation was false and induced the plaintiff to enter the contract

Ratio Decidendi

The court found on the evidence that the defendant's salesmen represented the car was of 1976 manufacture, that representation was false and was a fundamental term of the contract; because the defendant was in a better position to prove the manufacture year and documentary evidence supported shifting the burden, rescission was ordered and damages awarded for the plaintiff's losses.

Court Disposition

Judgment for Plaintiff; rescission granted.

Orders

  • Rescission of contract granted
  • Return of deposit of $25,000 to Plaintiff